Not angry. Not miffed, not even irked. More of a head-scratcher, really. It's like you haven't been reading Allan's blog for all these years.

People not picking this team to do well doesn't prove one thing or another. It isn't some kind of proof that numbers don't matter. And numbers don't mean chemistry doesn't matter. The 2013 Sox are a surprise, and we love them, but would we love them if they were losing? Would they be having so much fun if they were losing?

(Btw, did you pick this team to do well? I did, based on nothing.)

Here you're kind of saying that BV messed up the team by being an asshole. Now, I have a huge dislike for BV and never supported him - whereas you said several times he would be fun, would shake up the team, would bring excitement.

So did BV eff up with his obnoxious personality, or is it possible he also made several bad decisions, maybe even many bad decisions, that led to losses, and losses led to bad chemistry?

Finally, I suggest that the "chemistry vs numbers" line of thought is beneath any serious baseball fan and is long due for retirement.

You cannot watch baseball without paying attention to numbers. No one does. And no one advances numbers at the expense of the game. The numbers are there to bring greater understanding, to answer questions (who is the better pitcher? which hitter brings the most to the team?) in a rational manner as opposed to a superficial manner. But it's not like there are two games, one called fun and one called numbers. They coexist all the time. Then every once in a while, someone decides numbers are bad or silly or worthless and makes fun of the people who advance them.

Honestly, I didn't know what to think of this team. But I think I mentioned on this blog that they would be fun before game 1. Booby V was a mistake, but I also think there were alot of players on that team that were bad for the team.

With the numbers thing , I didnt know what to think of Shane Victorino comeing into this season. Especially after he had a down season last year. But he does alot of things that don't show up in a stat. First to third on a base hit , runners very rarely run first to third on him, moves runners over. He is so much better thatn I thought he would be.

The Red Sox just went back to the ways when they won. But I also believe the "numbers" they use are different than the ones the casual fan sees everyday.

I think you are taking what I meant as a positive and somehow making it a negative.

You cannot watch baseball without paying attention to numbers. No one does. And no one advances numbers at the expense of the game. The numbers are there to bring greater understanding, to answer questions (who is the better pitcher? which hitter brings the most to the team?) in a rational manner as opposed to a superficial manner. But it's not like there are two games, one called fun and one called numbers. They coexist all the time. Then every once in a while, someone decides numbers are bad or silly or worthless and makes fun of the people who advance them.

Almost every media outlet predicted this team to finish dead last. That was based on what? Two years ago the Red Sox were predicted to 100 games.

My only point was that was all based on numbers nothing more nothing less.

I would also tend to believe the Red Sox have more info on players than fans do. In info and "numbers" I mean mental makeup and personality... I cant believe you didnt understand that is what I meant from the first post....

I would also tend to believe the Red Sox have more info on players than fans do. In info and "numbers" I mean mental makeup and personality...

Of course, they have more info. Like thousands of times more info. In addition to trying to get players who have a good mental makeup, they also use stats (both public and proprietary) to a degree that would likely make our collective heads spin.

I feel as though you think I was attacking you guys , that was never my intent....

I beileve the only way I know how good a player really is by watching them every game. I only watch the Red Sox. I could look at stats all day and see who is leading in different categories, and assume the leaders are good players sometime that is not the fact.

I felt that way with Aidrian Gonzalez, but when he got here , he still hit .300, but he was very one dimensional at the plate and on the basepaths. Just my opinion.

I feel as thoug Papi and Pedey are better hitters than Gonzalez. But the Red Sox would never fathom giving them guys that same contract.

I also thought Beltre was a great everday player but they didnt want him?

I beileve the only way I know how good a player really is by watching them every game.

There is great value in that. When you watch a player every day, you do get a great sense of his strengths and weaknesses.

But (a) it's impossible to watch every player every day and (b) the human memory is a tricky thing. When we like a player's style, we may remember him in a more positive light, and the same in reverse.

Adding (a) and (b) together is why we need numbers. If we only relied on human memory and who we can physically see play every day, we would make some very bad decisions!

You personally may not enjoy fooling around with stats in order to know things. That's cool. But there's no doubt that the right statistics will tell you more about a player, beyond the limits of your own eyes and memory.

When you bring up contracts, IMO that is a completely different matter. Contracts are not only based on stats, there are many other factors.

I pay zero attention to what anyone earns. I don't know and don't care.